Digital technologies in young people’s lives: Access and time use

Digital technologies in young people’s lives

The following sections first explore young people’s access to and time use of digital devices. Following this, the commentary turns to relationships with others, young people’s sense of identity, and their mental health and well-being, including exposure to online harms. For the purposes of this report, we separate these latter themes out into discrete sections, but we understand that in reality, they are often interconnected.

1. Access and time use

This section collates data on the digital devices 14–24-year-olds in the UK have access to and how their time use on these devices has been measured. We draw primarily on data from Understanding Society[ref]Institute for Social and Economic Research University of Essex, ‘Understanding Society: Calendar Year Dataset, 2022. [Data Collection]’, 2024, http://doi.org/10.5255/UKDA-SN-9333-1. [/ref] and a range of publications from Ofcom on media use and attitudes.

These sources are relevant to our analysis due to the relevance of the age ranges they include and represent the most current data available.

Young people’s access to digital devices is important from a digital inclusion perspective as key services are often mediated through technology (for example, applying for higher education, completing homework, and accessing financial services). Understanding time spent on digital devices is also helpful in light of debates around screentime, time with devices replacing physical activity, and what a healthy balance between time with and without digital technologies means for young people[ref]Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology, Ott, A., and Bermingham, R. (2020). Screen Use and Health in Young People. Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology. Available from: https://doi.org/10.58248/pn635. [/ref].

The types of digital devices young people have access to and how they are spending time on these devices have been measured across several large-scale and robust public-attitude surveys. Some of these surveys are detailed in Appendix 2.

Box 1 contains figures from the latest Ofcom reporting on digital device access and digital media use and shows some differences between the younger and older age groups[ref]Ofcom (2025). Children and Parents: Media Use and Attitudes Report, 2025. Available from: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/siteassets/resources/documents/research-and-data/media-literacy-research/children/childrens-media-use-and-attitudes-report-2025/childrens-media-literacy-report-2025.pdf?v=396621. [/ref]^,[ref]Ofcom (2025). Adults’ Media Use and Attitudes 2025: Interactive Report. Available from: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/media-use-and-attitudes/media-habits-adults/adults-media-use-and-attitudes-2025-interactive-report. [/ref].

What devices do 14–24-year-olds have access to?

The types of devices people use to engage with the online world has rapidly changed over time. Trend data from the UK finds that the proportion of people aged 5–15 using smartphones or tablet devices to go online has significantly increased over the last 10 years[ref]Ofcom (2024). Children and Parents: Media Use and Attitudes Report, 2024. Available from: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/siteassets/resources/documents/research-and-data/media-literacy-research/children/children-media-use-and-attitudes-2024/childrens-media-literacy-report-2024.pdf?v=368229. [/ref].

Perhaps unsurprisingly, smartphones are particularly accessible for young people today. The vast majority (over 90%) of 14–24-year-olds in the UK either own a smartphone or can borrow one[ref]Ofcom (2025). Children and Parents: Media Use and Attitudes Report, 2025. Available from: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/siteassets/resources/documents/research-and-data/media-literacy-research/children/childrens-media-use-and-attitudes-report-2025/childrens-media-literacy-report-2025.pdf?v=396621. [/ref]^,[ref]University of Essex, Institute for Social and Economic Research (2024). Understanding Society: Calendar Year Dataset, 2022 [data collection]. Available from: http://doi.org/10.5255/UKDA-SN-9333-1. [/ref]. Other digital devices, like tablets, are not as widely held across our cohort, as shown by Figure 1.

Figure 1: 14–24-year-olds’ access to smartphones, laptops and tablets[ref]University of Essex, Institute for Social and Economic Research (2024). Understanding Society: Calendar Year Dataset, 2022 [data collection]. Available from: http://doi.org/10.5255/UKDA-SN-9333-1. [/ref]

See full figure description here.

Figure 1 also alludes to some of the challenges around measuring access to digital devices. Access to devices can be measured in a multitude of ways. The data in Figure 1 draws from questions asking about whether devices are available in the home to borrow, whether a device is owned by the individual, and whether the device is used by an individual. The last aspect of this may seem related more to time use than access but also touches on whether a device is useable – for instance, devices with old operating systems may be present in the home but not be practical for everyday use. These different conceptualisations of device access carry different meanings and implications around connectivity, highlighting a challenge in drawing comparisons across data points as well as within a single survey on digital access.

The high levels of smartphone ownership across our age group might suggest high levels of digital participation and inclusion in the UK. But device access, particularly focusing on smartphones, offers an incomplete picture of digital inclusion. For instance, when asked to determine what is enough to feel digitally included in a household with children, young people and parents/carers state that a suite of both digital goods and services are of importance, which includes reliable broadband, mobile data and a sufficient number of large-screen devices like laptops or tablets for young people in a household to complete schoolwork on[ref]Yates, S., et al. (2024). A Minimum Digital Living Standard for Households with Children: Overall Findings Report. Available from: https://mdls.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/MDLS-final-report-v1.11-1.pdf. [/ref].

Currently, approximately 81% of households with children have full access to the digital goods and services described above[ref]Yates, S., et al. (2024). A Minimum Digital Living Standard for Households with Children: Overall Findings Report. Available from: https://mdls.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/MDLS-final-report-v1.11-1.pdf. [/ref]. Factors associated with poverty, such as having a low household income or living in a deprived area, are correlated with not meeting this benchmark of digital goods and services[ref]Yates, S., et al. (2024). A Minimum Digital Living Standard for Households with Children: Overall Findings Report. Available from: https://mdls.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/MDLS-final-report-v1.11-1.pdf.. [/ref]. Digital goods and services, as we will explore in this commentary, permeate many aspects of young people’s lives, including their education.

So, while smartphones appear to be readily accessible and available to 14–24-year-olds, access to other devices such as tablets and desktops or laptops may be more fragmented. And continuous access to these devices – with enough in a household for young people to participate in both schooling and work-related activities – and an internet connection, may be even more inconsistent. These inconsistencies relate to existing socio-economic inequalities in society[ref]Simeon Yates, Katherine Hill, Chloe Blackwell, et al., A Minimum Digital Living Standard for Households with Children: Overall Findings Report, n.d. [/ref], which are at risk of being exacerbated given the many areas of life that digital technologies permeate – including education and home learning.

How much time are 14–24-year-olds spending online?

To understand how people are spending their time with digital technologies, researchers typically rely on self-report measures. This means individuals themselves estimate how they are spending their time, rather than relying on other metrics like time use breakdowns from their smartphones, or on more active tracking and monitoring of their own time use, though these alternative methods are becoming more widely used. This section focuses on self-reported data, as other methods are not used widely enough to produce national-level estimates.

Estimates of self-reported time use on devices are variable. Most 13–18-year-olds report spending over 3.5 hours a day on average on phones[ref]Childwise (2024). The Monitor Report, 2024. Available from: https://www.childwise.co.uk/the-monitor-report. [/ref]^,[ref]Ofcom (2024). Online Nation 2024 Report. [/ref]. There is, however, considerable variation from person to person and across a typical week. For instance, 78% of 14-year-olds say they spend less than 4 hours a weekday interacting with friends through social media, gaming websites and other apps[ref]University of Essex, Institute for Social and Economic Research (2024). Understanding Society: Calendar Year Dataset, 2022 [data collection]. Available from: http://doi.org/10.5255/UKDA-SN-9333-1. Own analysis of raw data.[/ref]. On average, young people say they are spending longer doing these activities during weekends than on weekdays. Figure 2 shows self-reported time use with digital technologies across 14–24-year-olds, by weekday and weekend estimates. The figure shows that there is some fluctuation across age groups in terms of time use. For instance, time spent interacting with friends online appears to increase with age between the ages of 14 and 18, potentially peaking at age 18, where over 20% of people are spending over four hours a day doing this. In contrast, patterns in time use between the ages of 19 and 21 are relatively similar.

Figure 2: Hours spent by 14–21-year-olds interacting with friends online on weekdays and weekends[ref]University of Essex, Institute for Social and Economic Research (2024). Understanding Society: Calendar Year Dataset, 2022 [data collection]. Available from: http://doi.org/10.5255/UKDA-SN-9333-1. [/ref]

Weekday

Weekend

See full figure description here.

While Figure 2 demonstrates the prevalence of digital technologies in terms of time use, these figures alone are difficult to interpret in terms of their impacts on experiences of growing up. Data from Ofcom suggests that a significant proportion of young people are dissatisfied with the amount of time they spend on digital screens. One survey indicates that 38% of 13–17-year-olds think their time on screens is too high[ref]Ofcom (2025). Children and Parents: Media Use and Attitudes Report, 2025. Available from: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/siteassets/resources/documents/research-and-data/media-literacy-research/children/childrens-media-use-and-attitudes-report-2025/childrens-media-literacy-report-2025.pdf?v=396621. [/ref]. In a different survey, a lower proportion of 18–24-year-olds (21%) say they do not feel like they have a good balance between their online and offline lives[ref]Ofcom (2024). Online Nation 2024 Report. [/ref]. These data points suggest that dissatisfaction with screentime may be highest for those at the younger end of our age group of interest, leaving space for exploration into how and why screentime habits and attitudes may change over time.

What are 14–24-year-olds doing online?

As with time use, researchers often use self-report measures to understand what people are doing on digital technologies – asking young people to state whether, and how often, they do a range of discrete tasks like gaming, browsing social media, talking to friends online, working and completing homework.

Young people are often doing a range of digital activities. The majority (99%) of 16–24-year-olds use social media (through any app or website), watch videos on platforms like YouTube (87%), Instagram (80%) and TikTok (81%), and play games online (68%)[ref]Ofcom (2025). Adults’ Media Use and Attitudes 2025: Interactive Report. Available from: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/media-use-and-attitudes/media-habits-adults/adults-media-use-and-attitudes-2025-interactive-report. [/ref]. We also know that young people are required to engage with digital technologies to complete home learning activities, work, and access key services like financial banking.

Social media use in particular is central to much of the discourse surrounding young people’s experiences of growing up and digital technologies. Many young people use social media every day, with the majority spending their time viewing content rather than actively posting or sharing content. Figure 3 shows cross-sectional data from the latest wave of Understanding Society, highlighting that the majority (over 80%) of 16–24-year-olds browse social media every day, compared to less than a quarter who actively post on social media. This distinction, though simple, highlights that within the broad category of spending time on social media, there are nuances in terms of what that means for individuals’ behaviours.

Figure 3: Percentage of 16–24-year-olds daily looking through and actively posting on social media[ref]University of Essex, Institute for Social and Economic Research (2024). Understanding Society: Calendar Year Dataset, 2022 [data collection]. Available from: http://doi.org/10.5255/UKDA-SN-9333-1. [/ref]

See full figure description here.

Gaming is also a significant aspect of young people’s time use online. In a survey of 11–18-year-olds, 70% report gaming daily across any platform – including mobile phones, tablets and gaming consoles[ref]Ofcom (2023). Understanding Online Communications among Children. [/ref]. This research found that boys were gaming more regularly than girls, with much of this happening on phones or tablets, though PC gaming and gaming consoles still had significant usage. The trend of boys playing more than girls continues through to the age of 24, with 81% of boys/men aged 16–24 years old reporting that they play games online, compared to 54% of girls/women[ref]Ofcom (2025). Adults’ Media Use and Attitudes 2025: Interactive Report. Available from: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/media-use-and-attitudes/media-habits-adults/adults-media-use-and-attitudes-2025-interactive-report. [/ref].

New technologies may also be changing how young people spend their time. Analysis of the Ada Lovelace Institute’s nationally representative survey of public attitudes to, and experiences with, AI technologies shows that people aged 18–24 are more likely than those aged 25 and over to have used tools like ChatGPT for searching for answers/recommendations, educational purposes, writing emails, generating content, supporting job applications, and looking for guidance on issues (Figure 4)[ref]Modhvadia, R., et al. (2025). How Do People Feel about AI? Wave 2 (2025). Ada Lovelace Institute, The Alan Turing Institute. Available from: https://attitudestoai.uk/about-the-survey/citation-and-pdf. [/ref]. Education is a key aspect of young people’s lives as they grow up, with our data showing that over half (53%) of 14–24-year-olds have used an LLM tool for learning purposes. As these tools are relatively new, we currently do not have sufficient data on their impacts on the experiences of growing up, particularly in the transition from education to employment.

Figure 4: Personal experience of 18–24-year-olds and 25+-year-olds with LLMs, by activity[ref]Modhvadia, R., et al. (2025). How Do People Feel about AI? Wave 2 (2025). Ada Lovelace Institute, The Alan Turing Institute. Available from: https://attitudestoai.uk/about-the-survey/citation-and-pdf.[/ref]

18-24

25+

See full figure description here.

While many quantitative studies seek to categorise digital time use into discrete activities like interacting with friends on social media, gaming and watching videos, there is a recognition that time use is not always discrete. ‘Media-multitasking’ describes when individuals engage with two or more types of digital media at once, such as browsing social media while watching TV, or engaging with digital media and non-media activities at the same time, such as text messaging while studying[ref]van der Schuur, W.A., et al. (2015). The Consequences of Media Multitasking for Youth: A Review. Computers in Human Behavior 53. 204–15. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.06.035. [/ref].

Reflections from our Youth Insight Group

To begin a conversation around digital time use with our Youth Insight Group, we presented them with example digital time use charts from the Children’s Media Lives report[ref]Revealing Reality (2025). Children’s Media Lives 2025. Available from: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/siteassets/resources/documents/research-and-data/media-literacy-research/children/childrens-media-lives-2025/childrens-media-lives-2025-summary-report.pdf?v=396299. [/ref]. They were shown a pie chart of how a 14-year-old spent their time on their phones on a weekend (see Figure 5). They were then asked to reflect on these charts and discuss whether they resonated with their own experiences.

Figure 5: Example weekend time use chart of a 14-year-old[ref]Revealing Reality (2025). Children’s Media Lives 2025. Available from: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/siteassets/resources/documents/research-and-data/media-literacy-research/children/childrens-media-lives-2025/childrens-media-lives-2025-summary-report.pdf?v=396299. [/ref]

24 hours

See full figure description here.

Notably, these charts did not elicit emotive or judgmental responses – many were neither shocked nor surprised by what they saw: “I think it is pretty reasonable […] in a regular day of a 14-year-old, it is pretty reasonable”. One group member emphasised the need for sensitivity when researching digital time, showing an awareness that spending lots of time with devices often carries negative connotations.

There was also a sense across the group that the actual time use figure offers little insight into digital life, and instead, there needs to be attention on how time is being spent, rather than how much time. A group member asked, “What do we want young people to do on the weekends?” prompting discussion into what ‘good’ time use – in both an offline and online context – might be. Ideas of what is typical were also recognised to be individualised: “I think in some people’s cases that [the time shown in the pie chart] might be quite a lot. It depends what they are doing [online] as well.”

There was some discussion around how time with digital devices changes over the course of growing up. One of the older group members gave an example around social media platforms, discussing how they feel they have aged out of some platforms.

Others mentioned implementing strategies to limit the amount of time they spend on devices, with some sharing a sense of not feeling in control of their device use. One group member shared that over the last couple of years, they have “learnt not to use [their] phone a lot”, and this was driven by a desire to live more of life offline. Another spoke of the experience of “always” having the phone in their hands.

There was a sense that personal choice around time use only went so far, particularly as digital devices form a critical part of cultural and social infrastructure, and young people navigate complex algorithms designed to drive engagement.

Another member highlighted that the business model of social media platforms makes regulating time use difficult for young people: “People have choice, but also these social media companies are preying on them, so it is not always a choice”.

The reflections from the Youth Insight Group show that topics such as screentime are not neutral. They carry assumptions around what it means to have a ‘healthy’ relationship with digital devices, with narratives of ‘addiction’ prevalent among 14–24-year-olds. The young people in our Youth Insight Group expressed some resistance to these assumptions, highlighting the importance of empathy when interpreting screentime data. This group also alluded to the necessity of screentime – being ‘expected’ to use technology – which could point to the digitisation of key services and activities such as completing homework, applying for higher education, or entering full-time employment. Together, these reflections point to the importance of examining potential biases or assumptions that may be affecting a researcher’s starting position before they carry out a project, as well as subsequent research questions and interpretations of data.

Considerations for further research

Capturing time spent online is complex. It is difficult to interpret measures of time use without reading them in relation to what an individual perceives as either too much or too little, as beneficial or concerning. Without this knowledge, we as researchers risk projecting our own assumptions of what an appropriate amount of time engaging with digital technologies means, without leaving space for the experiences and values of young people themselves. At the same time, it is important to consider time spent with digital technologies in the context of a young person’s development and their offline lives – particularly if there is evidence to suggest excessive time spent with devices may be related to poorer cognitive skills and less physical activity.

In addition, broad categories like spending time on social media tell us little about how people aged 14–24 are engaging with digital technologies, or their motivations for doing so. Researchers have thought carefully about how to add more specificity to measures of digital time use – for instance, differentiating between time spent actively engaging with platforms compared to time spent viewing and consuming content. Further insights may come from researchers experimenting with measures other than self-reported time use. It is well established that relying on self-report measures in this field is unreliable, introducing high levels of measurement error[ref]Kaye, K., et al. (2020). The Conceptual and Methodological Mayhem of ‘Screen Time’. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17. 3661. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17103661. [/ref]. Moreover, defining time spent on digital devices is challenging; as technology changes, so do the ways people interact with it. For example, the emergence of LLMs in the public domain has already cut across the ways young people use digital technologies – for instance, as a tool to search for answers or recommendations (as we will discuss later). This changing landscape requires data collection methods to be responsive to emergent technologies and applications.

Further research in this domain may benefit from:

• Co-creation with a diverse range of people aged 14–24 to define the categories for device usage that feel most relevant to them
• Exploration into non-discrete classifications of device usage – for example, multitasking
• Exploration of how – and why – time with devices changes as young people grow older
• Study of the factors that may be underlying time spent online and driving individual differences in higher or lower levels of screentime
• Study of whether young people make trade-offs in their offline activities for more time on devices.

At the same time, we must also recognise that much of the data on how young people interact with digital technologies sits within the private rather than the public sector. This concentration reinforces a power imbalance between the private sector and civil society, allowing the former to use data from young people to build their business offerings. There is a range of methods that enable researchers to obtain information and collect data from organisations about their users – such as voluntary research partnerships, data scraping, and purchasing data – but researchers have generally characterised this level of access as inadequate[ref]Ofcom (2025). Researchers’ Access to Information from Regulated Services, 2025. Available from: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/siteassets/resources/documents/consultations/category-1-10-weeks/call-for-evidence-researchers-access-to-information-from-regulated-online-services/main-documents/researchers-access-to-information-from-regulated-online-services.pdf?v=399794. [/ref]. It is therefore important for policy options to be considered to address the power inequalities between the private sector and civil society organisations / independent researchers in this field. For instance, recommendations have been made for the establishment of an independent intermediary body that can serve as a governance function for data access, to facilitate the process without burdening researchers or companies[ref]Ofcom (2025). Researchers’ Access to Information from Regulated Services, 2025. Available from: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/siteassets/resources/documents/consultations/category-1-10-weeks/call-for-evidence-researchers-access-to-information-from-regulated-online-services/main-documents/researchers-access-to-information-from-regulated-online-services.pdf?v=399794. [/ref]^,[ref]Maj, B., and Pavel, V. (2025). Potential Unreached: Challenges in Accessing Data for Socially Beneficial Research. Ada Lovelace Institute. Available from: https://www.adalovelaceinstitute.org/blog/challenges-accessing-data-for-research/. [/ref].